BINAY PRAKASH Vs. DOMCO (P.) LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Bench hereby passes the following order in pursuance of orders passed by honourable High Court of Jharkhand on 19th August 2010 directing this Bench to decide as to whether the grievances pleaded in the company petition are attracting the ingredients of section 397 /398 of the Companies Act, 1956 ('the Act') or not.

(2.) THE direction given by the honourable High Court to the Company Law Board ('CLB') is to:

(3.) THE petitioners counsel states second respondent -company has a pig iron plant at Kharda, Distt. North 24 Parganas, West Bengal, and an associate of 2nd respondent, Lanco Industries Ltd. also has a pig iron plant at Kalahasti, Chittur District, Andhra Pradesh. On coming to know the intention of the petitioners to set up a pig iron plant, respondents 3 and 4 approached petitioner No. 1 and expressed their intention to set up pig iron plant of the company along with the petitioners. They also expressed their interest in supply of coal to the plant of second respondent and its associated company from the coal mine to be allotted to the company after meeting the entire requirement of the plant of first respondent -company. Second respondent -company expressed an intention to invest in first respondent -company for the purpose of setting up pig iron plant and the development of coal mine to be allotted to the company. Respondents 3 and 4 on behalf of second respondent, entered into a joint agreement with the petitioners on 27th January, 2004 to set up a pig iron plant. The said agreement was again modified on 27th March, 2004 with the following terms and conditions: